Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-04-18
party a boost by voting for the amend

y
81 am opposed to it,"
"Why? Tell me, il you have no objec-
ton; l am hunting for reasons"
because it invades my rights"
"In what way does it invade your rights
more than those of other menu"
81 didn't say it did, but 1t invades my
rights in common with those of other
men,
"TelI me how, please? The amend
ment doesn't say you shall not drink, but
that men shall not sell alcoholic or malt
liquors except in certain specified cases.
"Well, you are good one. If men are
not permitted to sell an article to anyone
doesn't that prevent those who want such
article from getting il? If prohibition
prohibits il says to man, you shall not
drink as plainly as though it were ex-
pressed in those words. If prohibition
does not prohibit then it is class legisla-
ton"
Chow do you make it class legislation"
eff it does not prohibit the use of
whisky or beer, and if they can be
bought in certain ways, in club
rooms, restaurants, hotels, etc, and if
rich men can import liquor in demijohns,
doesn't the law discriminate egains.
the poor devil who is only able to
drinkby the retail st saloons? It looks
like forcing total abstinence on poor men
to me-"
''Would total abstinence hurt them?"
"WOuld it hurt Christian to die and
60 to he8ven?"
"What do you mean?"
81 mean this: If poor men who don't
want IL must have this amendment forced
on them because total abstinence doesn't
hurt them, wouldn't it be right to pass 8
law to kill all the Christians because
death wouldn't hurt them?"
"Weu, but good gracious, you don't
mean to say that the privilege of drinking
IS as sweet as life and lover"
"NO, glass of beer to the poor man is
not as precious as is life and family to
the Christian; but every privilege is dear
to the men VINO enjoy them, and if this
amendment can take one away, when will
the next be demanded and what will it be?
There have been laws which regulated
the privilege of human affection so far as
to prohibit husbands from kissing their
wives on certain days"
500 you honestly think such laws could
be possible in this day and generation?"
81 don't know. [ only know that
shall not vote to start in that direction"
Moving modestly about among crowd
of county officials, THE GAZETTE edged
one of them off to one side and asked:
"What do you think of prohibition?
Don't be afraid, l am not soliciting an
interview"
The official frown softened into a smile,
and the gentleman said: g Excuse me
for smiling, but you are the tenth man
VINO has put that question to me to-day.
l am opposed to prohibition"
"Tell me why. l am hunting for the
evidence in this case"
Gwen, sir, the loss OF revenue to the
state through licenses must be made good
by taxation. See the amount appropcia-
ted to run the state and then examine the
COmptroller's report and note how large
percentage of the needed funds is
derived from the tax on whisky and beer
sales"
eyes, but Will The state save nothing
in criminal costs in trials of Ofenses due
TO whisky"
"Thera are some costs accruing
from the trial of such offenses,
but do not believe they will at all Offset
the loss in revenue now derived from
Licenses. The Jury fund comes mainly
from occupation taxes on saloons. Were
those taxes shut off, the advalOrem taxes
must be increased to meet the loss, and
this state is in no condition now to I'M
dergo the travail of the transformation.
This consideration would lead me to say
not this year, but some other year, for
prohibition. l also oppose the amend
ment, because | am Democrat"
Qnf 10 Of nrfi 4nS ho-
been submitted as non-partisan meas
ure."
every true, and let US say man may
favor or oppose without compromise of
mis- Democratic standing; but what of
1883 ?"
Chow do you mean?"
"This: the amendment may not be a
party question with Democrats but it is
with Prohibitionists, and l make Ger
tain distinction between them. When
Democrats assist Prohibitionsts to "a
boom of their ISSUE will not Democrats
be sharpening an axe for the looping off
of their own limbs in the presidential
contest?"
"Do you answer your own question in
the affirmatiVe?"
81 do. Human nature IS as strong
now in man as ever, and II prohibition is
aided to a boom by Democrats, then
Democrats need not blame anyone but
themselves if they see a Republican in
place after next year"
Another gentleman came walking up
with his mouth fixed to ask the old, old
question, when THE GAZETTE stroIled
away into the crowd and, in mere wan
tonness of curiosity, put the question to
q gentleman to whom it had appealed
some days previous: "Well, how do you
stand on prohibition by this timer"
81 am for It,"
"For it! Why thought you were OPP
posed to it."
$50 l was. But have heard anti
Prohlbitionists declare that this move
ment was intended to disrupt the Demo
cratic party, and was Republican trick.
But what did we see in this city at the
late election? A Democrat was nomi-
mated for alderman and saloon man was
put up against the nominee, and beat him.
1t looks to me as if the anti-ProhibitiOn-
lists had as little regard for Democracy as
they charge to the Prohibitionists."
E'But wasn't the opposition candidate
Republican as we'll as q saloon man?
Why not say he was run as Republl
CAM"
bov